Signature spell vs Spontaneous spell

[Curois]

So what's the deal here? The Forgotten Realms Campaignsetting contains the signature spell feat which allows arcane casters to spontaneously convert spells to a chosen spell as long as the converted spells are of the same or lower level.
The epic level handbook contains the Spontaneous spell feat which does pretty much the same.
IMHO the "epic" pre-req for the latter feat makes quite a difference from the former. Any errata on this? Any opinions on which one is the "right" one?

 

[EyeontheMountain]

The simple answer is to go with the one published last.

Teh simpler answer is to consider them two toally different effects, no matter how close they are

BTW, a lot of the sop-called epic feats have been brought down to normmal levels in 3.5

 

[Curois]

The epic feats brought down to non-epic in 3.5, are they in the player's handbook of 3.5? I only have the 3rd edition PHB.
Also, if the effects are so similar, they ARE for all intends and purposes similar feats IMHO. And that still raises the question on what feat to allow in a campaign.

Yours truly

 

[kaomera]

"Which feat to allow" is DM's call. However, while the effects may be the same these aren't the same feat. One is a FR feat (and a regional feat too, IIRC), the other is epic. (Also: both are only in 3.0 products, AFAIK.) So, barring a DM ruling otherwise, you can take Signature Spell if you are playing in the Realms and meet any other requirements (specifically: if it is indeed a regional feat, you must be from the appropriate region), and Spontaneous Spell if you are level 21+ and using the epic rules.

The Epic feats in 3.5 are in the DMG, not the PH, btw...

 

[Thanee]

Signature Spell is fine as in the FRCS, including requirements, it doesn't need to be epic.

Bye
Thanee